Guns

[email protected]

That does make it better!

[email protected]

I dont see a problem with owning guns. Its just taken too lightly in the states. To get a gun where im at, you need to get certified - theoretical, physical and psychological tests are done. And no one starts pissing about personal freedoms if they fail these tests. I think you also need to be member of a shooting club. Point is, you need to demonstrate your ability to handle a weapon responsibly. Im not one to confuse correlation with causation but... you dont see many stories of shootings here.

[email protected]

I'm sorry you feel that way, but none of what you're saying in any way addresses my point: your argument is fundamentally based on the aforementioned false dichotomy. You are the most reliable protector of you. Nobody has a greater motivation to protect you than you. Regulation should recognize that fact.

I understand it may seem like I am "hyper focused" on this rebuttal to your argument, but that is only because you have asked for further response, without actually addressing my initial argument. You've presented no new arguments for me to consider.

Pavel Chichikov

How about you just give them guns so they can shoot the acid attackers. Turns out, you don't need much training with a gun. Point shoot. Very simple. Point shoot. School shooters figure it out just fine.

[email protected]

Most reliable protector? What kind of word salad AI bullshit are you trying to feed me.

Still waiting.

[email protected]

I utilized conjugations of your own words:

You are seriously arguing that the corruption in our police system means there is no protection? This is objectively false.I would trust an officer over Ultragagginggunnut any day of the week.

(Emphasis mine)

You identified two possible "protectors". Your argument failed to consider yourself as a third option. That oversight is a fundamental flaw in your initial argument.

You are not a "prisoner". You are the person in the best position to protect you. That fact is not represented in your initial argument.

[email protected]

I think we are done here. You are clearly just generating AI garbage.

Not waiting anymore.

[email protected]

It's been a pleasure. My hope is that in future arguments, you will remember your own agency and empowerment.

[email protected]

Actually Sudden Impact same actor tho https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xy-eMIXT4LM

[email protected]

*When anyone does it.

The solution to there being too many guns is to remove the guns. Not add more.

[email protected]

The working class must remain armed.

[email protected]

Aren't shooting clubs and the licensing prohibitively expensive? This is just to disarm the working class. If the poor can't afford equal protection they are slaves.

[email protected]

I wouldn't look at it from that perspective. Similar situation with driving licenses, which require first aid training, 20+ hours of driving lessons with an instructor, theory lessons, testing, and costly things of that nature. If you want a gun and are fit to own one, you will not have a problem doing so, no matter your class.

Gil Wanderley

Thanks for reminding me of Cyanide and Happiness' Guns short.

[email protected]

Not now, unfortunately while they can produce light so you don't shoot your wife six times, they sadly lack the ability to alter the space time continuum and change the past, sorry to disappoint. You have to use the flashlight before you shoot the wrong person, the flashlight can't unshoot someone.

Btw you do know that just because some people kill their wives that doesn't mean everyone will, right? You worried your wife is the next Jody Arias? No? See it works much the same way here, not every man is going to be Chris Benoit. That's like that racist "13% of the population 50% of the crime," it doesn't mean all black people are criminals, nor does your stat mean "all men" or even "all gunowners" are wifemurderers.

[email protected]

'Omosexuals, and 'eterosexuals? Yeah I think that place is England and they just talk like that. Its their language they're allowed to speak it horribly

[email protected]

Some people think that situations where they can rely on others' strength are normal.

Thus they may agree with need for weapons and self-defense, because "it's a dangerous time", but not when everything is in order again. Not even thinking that said "dangerous time" somehow happened and will happen again.

Guns are similar to fire extinguishers and defibrillators in that most of time they are not needed.

[email protected]

I don't even know where to start.

There will be fewer acid attacks with guns because everyone will have access to a way more convenient and easy way of harming each other, yes.

So....problem solved?

Which side of the argument are you actually on?

[email protected]

You are correct, I misspoke there. I was intending to say that I wasn’t saying the burglars were worse than the murderer—it just came out wrong.

[email protected]

Perhaps you will learn to remove your head from your ass and not use AI to make yourself look even more stupid than you are. Who are we kidding though.